Diversity, Connectivity, and Thriving in Work Groups

Comments (0)

Transcript of Diversity, Connectivity, and Thriving in Work Groups

Diversity, Connectivity, and Thriving in Work GroupsIntroductionOver 50% of US organizations utilize work groups, many of which are diverse.Diversity in work groups is argued to be both beneficial, and harmful. Not that simple. Type of diversity and context matters, but research is limited.ThrivingVitality Learning Thriving is a self-reflecting motivational state. Outcomes of ThrivingJob PerformanceInnovative Work BehaviorsCareer Development InitiativeBurnoutGood Citizenship BehaviorJob SatisfactionMeaning and PurposeHigher quality relationshipsCollaboration skillsResilienceAntecedents of ThrivingSpreitzer (2005): Trust, respect, relational resources.Carmeli and Spreitzer (2009)ConnectivityTrustDiversity and ThrivingDiversity and connective processes are assumed to be negatively related.Observable differences evoke categorization and stereotypes that hinder thriving.H1: Relations-oriented diversity within a group will be negatively related to connectivity and trust.ModelThings to Consider/LimitationsImpact of diversity beliefsDistribution of thriving within a groupLeadership impactTeam type/Length/Type of TaskGroup SizeTime spent in groupGroup Power DynamicsOccupational DemographyMultiple Team MembershipReferencesAnderson, N., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Nijstad, B. A. (2004). The routinization of innovation research: A constructively critical review of the state-of-the-science. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 147–173. Andreas, W., Giles, Daan, & Markus. (2012). Creative Self-Efficacy and Individual Creativity in Team Contexts: Cross-Level Interactions With Team Informational Resources. Journal of Applied Psychology. doi:10.1037/a0029359Carmeli, A., & Spreitzer, G. (2009). Trust, Connectivity, and Thriving: Implications for Innovative Behaviors at Work. Journal of Creative Behavior, 43, 169–191. doi:10.1002/j.2162-6057.2009.tb01313.xCavusgil, S. T., Calantone, R. J., & Zhao, Y. (2003). Tacit knowledge transfer and firm innovation capability. Journal of Business Industrial Marketing, 18, 6–21.Cummings, J. N. (2004). Work Groups, Structural Diversity, and Knowledge Sharing in a Global Organization. Management Science, 50, 352–364.Cummings, J. N., Kiesler, S., Bosagh Zadeh, R., & Balakrishnan, A. D. (2013). Group Heterogeneity Increases the Risks of Large Group Size: A Longitudinal Study of Productivity in Research Groups. Psychological science. doi:10.1177/0956797612463082Harvey, S. (2013). A different perspective: The multiple effects of deep level diversity on group creativity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(5), 822–832. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2013.04.004DiversityRelations-Oriented Diversity: Harmful?Task-Oriented Diversity: Beneficial?Main effect is zero. Context is important.Individual Outcomes? Diversity and ThrivingTask-oriented is less salient and must be realized socially. Groups are already task-focused.H2: Task-oriented diversity within a group will be positively related to connectivity and trust.Distribution HypothesesDiversity as an abstract concept seems highly beneficially, but benefits are not always accessed. Saliency has been shown to impact group outcomes.Distribution of diversity within a group affects saliency.Uneven: incivility, exploitationEven: focus away from faultlines, more open-minded.Joshi, A., & Roh, H. (2009). The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta- analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 599–627. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2009.41331491Meyer, B., & Schermuly, C. C. (2012). When beliefs are not enough: Examining the interaction of diversity faultlines, task motivation, and diversity beliefs on team performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. doi:10.1080/1359432X.2011.560383Porath, C., Spreitzer, G., Gibson, C., & Garnett, F. G. (2011). Thriving at work : Toward its measurement , construct validation , and theoretical refinement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 275, 250–275. doi:10.1002/jobSpreitzer, G., Porath, C. L., & Gibson, C. B. (2012). Toward human sustainability: How to enable more thriving at work. Organizational Dynamics, 41(2), 155-162.Prelude. 2006. [Screenshot from “Office Space”]. Retrieved from http://www.listal.com/viewimage/24408 The U.S. Bureau of labor Statistics. (2012).Charts by Topic: Work and employment. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/tus/charts/work.htmVan Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual review of psychology, 58, 515–541. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085546Jem LugoIntroductionResearch has failed to demonstrate the process through which diversity acts on groups.Group outcomes are developed through individual processes.Diversity acts on work groups through its effects on individual group members.IntroductionIt is often assumed that diversity affects the connectivity and trust of group members. Connectivity and trust are related to group performance and thriving. Diversity-->Connectivity and Trust-->Outcomes? Group outcomes of diversity are moderated by salience.ProposalConnectivity and trust are processes through which diversity impacts individual thriving and group performance. This process is moderated by the distribution of diversity within the group, which affects the saliency of the diversity of the members. Distribution HypothesesH3: The distribution of diversity within a team moderates the relationship between diversity and connectivity and trust, such that an even distribution of task-oriented diversity within a team will increase the positive relationship between task-oriented diversity and connectivity, and an even distribution of relations-oriented diversity within a team will cancel out or reduce the negative effects of relations-oriented diversity on connectivity. H4: An uneven distribution will decrease the positive relationship between task-oriented diversity and connectivity and trust, leading to exploitation and greater stress of the task-diverse minority, and increase the negative relationship between relations-oriented diversity and connectivity, leading to tokenism and negative effects related to being singled out and stereotyped. ModelH5: There is an overall positive relationship between connectivity and trust and thriving. H6: Thriving is positively related to group performance and outcomes.